DEBATE

Why People Debate?“A man never tells you anything until you contradict him”

• George Bernard Shaw (1856 - 1950) Irish playwright

“I love argument, I love debate. I don't expect anyone just to sit there and agree with me, that's not their job”

• Margaret Thatcher (1925 - Present) British prime minister

“You will never understand your opponent’s argument, unless you fully understand your own”

• Book: Political Spectrum

TYPES OF DEBATES1. Team Policy Debate / National Debate Tournament

Team policy debates feature two teams of two debaters each. The format consists of eight speeches--four constructive speeches and four rebuttals--and four periods of cross-examination. Emphasis is put on presenting large amounts of evidence as quickly and as coherently as possible. 

2. Cross-Examination Debate Association, or CEDADebates are a newer type of two-on-two collegiate debate. Unlike NDT debates, CEDA debates have resolutions that are not related to policy. CEDA debates are intended to be based on values, but, like NDT, a lot of evidence can be presented.

3. Lincoln-Douglas DebateInspired by the debates between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen A. Douglas during a senatorial race in the 1850s. They are one-on-one debates that focus on arguing for or against competing moral and ethical values. There traditionally has been a strong emphasis on speaking persuasively, logically and clearly in Lincoln-Douglas debates.

4. Spontaneous argumentation, or SPARDebates feature two debaters who draw a topic at random (traditionally out of a hat). The debaters then spend a few minutes preparing what they will say before engaging in a brief debate on the topic. It is often used in college and university classrooms and helps decrease speaker anxiety and build confidence. Because the debates do not require serious research, they focus more on presentation and style than on content.

5. Parliamentary DebateSimilar to SPAR debates, parliamentary debates require no prior research. Resolutions are established only 10 minutes or so before a round of debate begins, so wit, logic and persuasiveness are strongly emphasized. These debates are referred to as "parliamentary" because of their resemblance to the debates that occur in British Parliament. There are two teams of two debaters in parliamentary debates, and a round consists of six speeches: four constructive speeches and two rebuttal speeches.

6. Oregon-Oxford Debate

Lincoln-Douglas Debates

In a series of seven debates in 1858, Abraham Lincoln challenged United States Senator Stephen Douglas’s support of a law allowing slavery in free territory

Lincoln lost his bid for Douglas’s Senate seat, but the debates helped pave the road to the presidency

Nixon-Kennedy Debate

Democratic presidential candidate John F. Kennedy faced Republican candidate Richard Nixon in four nationally televised debates during the 1960 United States presidential campaign

Kennedy was widely regarded as the winner of the debates, which helped him win the presidency

COMPONENTS1. History of Debate2. Objectives3. The Resolution4. Research5.  Case-building6. Parts of the Debate7. Speaker Roles8. The Constructive Speech 

HISTORY OF DEBATEDebate during the Olden Days

It was in 5th Century B.C. in Syracuse a city from Ancient Greece has gone through war and revolution

People struggled for peace and order

A particular concern for them was land ownership for lands were claimed through memory

WHAT IS DEBATE?Debate is basically a response to a problem

It is a competition using words and logic

It is to change people’s minds and actions through our words and power of conviction.

OBJECTIVES OF DEBATEMAIN OBJECTIVES SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES

•To resolve the issue intelligently at the end of the debate

To have a comprehensive grasp of issues

To be able to prepare a case which tackles the P, N and B

THE RESOLUTIONthe process of

resolving something such as

a problem or dispute

CHARACTERISTICS

•Stated as: Let it be resolved that (LIBRT)

:______________

1. Usually about a policy

2. Stated in a way that alters the status quo

STATUS QUO:the condition or state of affairs that currently exists

3. Positively-stated

RESEARCHBEFORE CASE-BUILDING AFTER CASE-BUILDING

Research first before case-building

The team should research before building their case if the issue is new and is still developing

The team should build their case first before undergoing research when the issue has already been widely discussed and debated

CASE-BUILDINGBURDEN OF EACH TEAMAFFIRMATIVE NEGATIVE

• Burden of Proof Must establish a prima

facie case▫ PRIMA FACIE CASE

Is a case believed to be true unless otherwise proven

Must prove all aspects of their case to win

Can not win based on the inability of the negative to prove its case

• Burden of RebuttalMust destroy either of the P, N, or B of the affirmative’s case

Can not discuss anything that the affirmative did not bring up

ASPECTS OF THE CASE1. Practicability

Feasibility of a proposition, includes matter of:a. Lawb. Clamorc. Finance

2. NecessityNeed for the proposition, discusses the

presence or absence of an inherent flaw in the status quo

3. BeneficialityAdvantages or disadvantages of adopting or

rejecting the resolution, includes:a. Specific Beneficiariesb. Specific Benefits 

PARTS OF THE DEBATE

1. Constructive Speech

• The presentation of each team member’s arguments and evidence for each aspect of the case• 5 minutes each

2. Interpellation

• The opportunity for each debater to ask and answer questions regarding their speeches• 3 minutes

3. Rebuttal

• The summary and defense of each team’s arguments and evidence, to be delivered by either the scribe or the team captain

• 6 minutes

SPEAKERS’ ROLE

3 Speakers

• 1. Practicability Speaker• 2. Necessity Speaker• 3. Beneficiality Speaker

1 Scribe

• A copier or transcriber of documents, especially somebody who copied manuscripts in medieval times

1ST SPEAKER AFFIRMATIVE SIDEI.IntroductionII. State the proposition            A. Define the terms            B. Give the status quo                                    1.         What is the status quo?                                    2.         What is wrong with it?            C. State your standIII. Team SplitIV. Case Line            A. State all your arguments first            B. Go back, then strengthen each one            C. Always give transition. You could repeat

the argument after your explanationVI. Conclusion                                 

1ST SPEAKER NEGATIVE SIDEI. IntroductionII. State the proposition of the

affirmative  A. Negate or show the clash with the

given propositionIII. Rebut the 1st speaker of the

affirmative side’s argumentsIV. Caseline

A. Same as the 1st speaker of the affirmative side

V. Conclusion A. Same as the 1st speaker of the

affirmative side

REBUTTAL SPEAKER FROM AFFIRMATIVE AND NEGATIVE SIDES

I. IntroductionII. State the proposition

A. What has happened in this debate?

B. Where was the clash?III. Rebuttal of the Opposing team

A. What have they said?B. Why is it wrong?C. Fallacies committed

SUMMARY

A. Restate all the arguments of each speaker

1. What have they said?2. Why is it right?

B. Strengthen arguments by giving more examples or elaboration

C. Conclusion 

Issue: Death PenaltyMaterial Object: Life

3 Mental Operations:1. Terms: Life is Precious2. Proposition : Death Penalty Defies The Sanctity Of Life As A Precious Gift From God 3. Arguments:

SyllogismMajor Premise: All human beings have the

right to enjoy the gift of life from God regardless of their social status

Minor Premise: Criminals are human beingsConclusion: Therefore, criminals have

the right to enjoy the gift of life from God

SEAT WORKConstruct your own argument applying the following concepts (25 Points)